GeForce MX330 vs Radeon HD 6250

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the rankingnot rated574
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data43.61
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameCedarGP108
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date31 January 2011 (13 years ago)10 February 2020 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores80384
Core clock speed650 MHz1531 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1594 MHz
Number of transistors292 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)19 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate5.20038.26
Floating-point processing power0.104 TFLOPS1.224 TFLOPS
ROPs416
TMUs824

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount512 MB2 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed500 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth8 GB/s48.06 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMINo outputs
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus-+

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.06.4
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.21.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA-6.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

HD 6250 93
GeForce MX330 2430
+2513%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

HD 6250 172
GeForce MX330 4834
+2710%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

HD 6250 1091
GeForce MX330 20729
+1800%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 31 January 2011 10 February 2020
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 19 Watt 10 Watt

GeForce MX330 has an age advantage of 9 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 90% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 6250 and GeForce MX330. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6250 is a desktop card while GeForce MX330 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon HD 6250
Radeon HD 6250
NVIDIA GeForce MX330
GeForce MX330

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.4 77 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6250 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 2161 vote

Rate GeForce MX330 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.